Epiphytic bryocoenoses in nemoral forests are considered from the standpoint of their consortive topical connections with tree trunks. The role of bryocoenoses in maintaining sustainability of forest ecosystems is highlighted. The sustainability is determined by accumulation of maximum energy in woodlands and depends on high diversity of eco-niches, which provide their larger density in eco-space. The research was conducted on two sites: Polyana village, Transcarpathian Region (CarpinetoFagetum, Carici pilosae-Carpinetum) and the Feofaniya forest near Kyiv city (Galeobdolon lutei-Carpinetum). The total sample comprised 105 trees (Quercus petraea, Q. robur, Fagus sylvatica, Carpinus betulus, Acer platanoides). A biotope of nemoral forests is considered as a complex of combined high-level syntaxa registered on tree trunks, including microalgae aerophytic communities (Desmococcetea olivacei), lichenocenoses (Leprarietea candelaris, Physcietea, Arthonio radiatae-Lecidelletea eleochromae), and bryocoenoses (Frullanio dilatatae-Leucodontetea sciuroides, Neckeretea complanatae, Cladonio digitatae-Lepidozietea reptantis). A shift of the minimum zone of thallus extension (165°) to the east from the south and of the maximum zone (325°) to the west from the north was observed. It is shown that the pattern of distribution of typical epiphytic bryocoenoses with high continuous projective covering of mosses (Hypnum cupressiforme, Anomodon attenuatus, Sciuro-hypnum populeum, Homalia trichomanoides, Metzgeria furcata, Pterigynandrum filiforme) is saddle-shaped and can be described by the equation. Its character is caused by variation of the ombroregime formed due to changes in soil and litter humidity, as well as bark structure and lighting (the latter ones play indirect roles). A phenomenon of inversion is described for steep northern slopes in comparison with open northern ones. This phenomenon on steep northern slopes is represented by patterns of moss cover near soil surface located higher up on the southern compass points of the trunk, than on the open northern ones. Investigation of moss communities as indicators of the nemoral forest biotopes is important for estimation and prediction of their response to the impact of environmental factors.

Keywords: biotope, epiphyte bryocoenoses, humidity, nemoral forest, structure, Carpino-Fagetea

Full text: PDF (Ukr) 1.00M

1. Bambe B. 2002. Epiksilās un epifītiskās augu sabiedrības uz koku stumbriem un trupošiem kokiem mazo upju krastos (Epixylic and epiphytic bryophyte societies on tree tranks and decayed wood in banks of small rivers). In: Latvijas Universitātes 58. zinātniskā konference. Zemes un Vides zinātņu sekcijas. Refeātu tēzes., Rīga, pp. 14–18.
2. Barkman J.J. 1958. Phytosociology and Ecology of Cryptogamic Epiphytes. Assen: Van Gorcum, 628 pp.
3. Bardunov L.V. 1984. Drevneyshie na sushe. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 159 pp.
4. Bates J.W. 1992. Influence of chemical and physical factors on Quercus and Fraxinus epiphytes at Loch Sunart, western Scotland: A multivariate analysis. Journal of Ecology, 80: 163–179. https://doi.org/10.2307/2261073
5. Bates J.W. 1997. Effects of intermittent desiccation on nutrient economy and growth of two ecologically contrasted mosses. Annals of Botany, 79(3): 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.1996.0335
6. Beklemishev V.N. 1951. Bulletin MOIP, 56(5): 3–30.
7. Berger F. 2000. Die Flechtenflora der schögener Schlinge im Oberosterreichen Don. Beitrage zur Naturkunde Oberosterreich, 9: 369–451.
8. Bykov V.A. 1970. Vvedenie v fitotsenologiyu. Alma-Ata: Nauka, 231 pp.
9. Didukh Ya.P. 2005. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 62(4): 455–467.
10. Didukh Ya.P. 2014. Dopovidi NAN Ukrainy, 8: 149–155. https://doi.org/10.15407/dopovidi2014.08.149
11. Didukh Ya.P. 2018. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 75(5): 405–420. https://doi.org/10.15407/ukrbotj75.05.405
12. Friedel A., Oheimb G.V., Dengler J., Härtle W. 2006. Species diversity and species composition of epiphytic bryophytes and lichens – a comparison of managed and unmanaged beech forests in NE Germany. Feddes Repertorium, 117(1–2): 172–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/fedr.200511084
13. Fritz Ö. 2009. Vertical distribution of epiphytic bryophytes and lichens emphasizes the importance of old beeches in conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation, 18: 289–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9483-4
14. Gapon S.V. 2010. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 67(3): 446–453.
15. Gapon S.V. 2011. Mokhopodibni Lisostepu Ukraini (roslinnist ta flora): Dr. Sci. Diss. Abstract. Kyiv, M.G. Kholodny Institute of Botany NAS of Ukraine, 36 pp.
16. Gapon Yu.V. 2018. Biolohiya ta ekolohiya, 4(1): 17–26.
17. Glime J.M. 1987. The role of tropisms in rhizoid attachment and branch orientation in fontinalis. Lindbergia, 13(1/2): 85–90.
18. Hedenas H., Bolyukh V.O., Jonsson B.G. 2003. Spatial distribution of epiphytes on Populus tremula in relation to dispersal mode. Journal of Vegetation Science, 14(2): 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2003.tb02148.x
19. Holubets M.A., Choronobay Yu.M. 1983. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 40(6): 23–28.
20. Hovden H.O. 2013. Variation in epiphytic bryophyte composition within and between ash trees at Tungesvik, Etne, W. Norway: Master of Science Thesisin Ecology and Evolution. Print: Reprosentralen, University of Oslo, 50 pp.
21. Khodosovtsev O.Ye., Maluga N.G., Darmostuk V.V., Khodosovtseva Yu.A., Klymenko V.M. 2017. Chornomorski Botanical Journal, 13(4): 481–515. https://doi.org/10.14255/2308-9628/17.134/6
22. Korchagin A.A. 1976. Stroenie rastitelnykh soobshchestv. Polevaya geobotanika, vol. 5. Leningrad: Nauka, 320 pp.
23. Kuusinen M., Penttinen A. 1999. Spatial patterns of threatened epiphytic bryophyte Neckera pennata of two scales in a fragmented boreal forest. Ecography, 22: 729–735. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1999.tb00522.x
24. Kyyak N.Ya., Baik O.L. 2011. Studia Biologica, 5(2): 131–140. https://doi.org/10.30970/sbi.0502.153
25. Lavrenko E.M. 1959. Osnovnye zakonomernosti rastitelnykh soobshchestv i puti ikh izucheniya. In: Polevaya geobotanika, vol. 1. Moscow, Leningrad: Izd-vo AN SSSR, pp. 13–75.
26. Longhton R.E. 1984. The role of bryophytes in terrestrial ecosystems. The Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory, 55: 147–163.
27. Marstaller R. 1992. Die Moosgesellschaften des Verbandes Neckerion complanatae Sm. et Had. in Kl. et Had. 1944. Herzogia, 9: 257–318.
28. Marstaller R. 2004. Die Moose und Moosgesellschaften des Naturschutzgebietes "Forst Bibra" bei Bad Bibra (Burgenlandkreis, Sachsen-Anhalt). Hercynia N.F., 37: 45–71.
29. Mazing V.V. 1966. Trudy MOIP, 27: 117–126. https://doi.org/10.17119/ryodoraku1960.1966.126_27
30. McCune B. 1993. Gradients in epiphyte biomass in three Pseudotsuga-Tsuga forests of different ages in western Oregon and Washington. Bryologist, 96: 405–411. https://doi.org/10.2307/3243870
31. Meusel H. 1935. Wuchsformen und Wuchstypen der europäischen Laubmoose. Nova acta Leopoldina (Neue Folge), 3(12): 123–277.
32. Mežaka A., Brūmelis G., Piterāns A. 2008. The distribution of epiphytic bryophyte and lichen species in relation to phorophyte characters in Latvian natural old-growth broad leaved forests. Folia Cryptogramica Estonica, 44: 89–99.
33. Moe B., Botnen A. 1997. A quantitative study of the epiphytic vegetation on pollarded trunks of Fraxinus excelsior at Havrå, Osterøy, western Norway. Plant Ecology, 129: 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009720132726
34. Mucina L., Bültmann H., Dierßen K., Theurillat J.-P., Raus T., Čarni A., Šumberová K., Willner W., Dengler J., Gavilán García R., Chytry M., Hájek M., Di Pietro R., Iakushenko D., Pallas J., Daniëls F.J.A., Bergmeier E., Santos Guerra A., Ermakov N., Valachovič M., Schaminée J.H.J., Lysenko T., Didukh Y.P., Pignatti S., Rodwell J.S., Capelo J., Weber H.E., Solomeshch A., Dimopoulos P., Aguiar C., Hennekens S.M., Tichý L. 2016. Vegetation of Europe: Hierarchical floristic classification system of vascular plant, bryophyte, lichen, and algal communities. Applied Vegetation Science, 19 (Suppl. 1): 3–264. https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12257
35. Obolenskyi V.N. 1933. Osnovy meteorologii. Moscow: OGIZSelkhozgiz, 457 pp.
36. Ovsiannikova N.V., Feklistov P.A., Vodkova N.V., Melekhov V.I., Tarakanov A.M., Merzlenko M.D. 2013. Lesnoy Zhurnal, 1: 39–42.
37. Pogrebniak P.S. 1963. Obshchee lesovodstvo. Moscow: Izdvo selskokhozyaystvennoy literatury, 399 pp.
38. Potzger J.E. 1939. Microclimate, evaporation stress, and epiphytic mosses. Bryologist, 42(3): 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1639/0007-2745(1939)42%5B53:MESAEM%5D2.0.CO;2
39. Protasov A.A. 2006. Sibirskiy Ekologicheskiy Zhurnal, 1: 97–103.
40. Putna S., Mežaka A. 2014. Preferences of epiphytic bryophytes for forest stand and substrate in North-East Latvia. Folia Cryptogamica Estonica, 51: 75–83. https://doi.org/10.12697/fce.2014.51.08
41. Rabotnov T.A. 1983. Phytocoenologia. Moscow: Izd-vo MGU, 292 pp.
42. Ramenski L.G. 1952. Botanycheskyi Zhurnal, 37(2): 181–201.
43. Rauner Yu.L. 1972. Teplovoy balans rastitelnogo pokrova. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 211 pp.
44. Richards P.W. 1952. The tropical rain forest. Moscow: Izd-vo inostrannoj literatury, 448 pp.
45. Rieley J.O., Richards P.W., Bebbington A.D.L. 1979. The ecological role bryophytes in a Nord Wales woodland. Journal of Ecology, 67: 497–527. https://doi.org/10.2307/2259109
46. Rose F. 1992. Temperate forest management: its effect on bryophyte and lichen floras and habitats. In: Bryophytes and lichens in a changing environment. Eds J.W. Bates, A.M. Farmes. London: Cleredon Press, pp. 211–233.
47. Rykovskiy G.F. 2011. Proiskhozhdenie i evolyutsiya mokhoobraznykh. Minsk: Belaruskaya navuka, 433 pp.
48. Sizykh A.P. 2015. Uspekhi sovremennogo estestvoznaniya, 1–6: 977–980.
49. Shakirova L.R. 2016. Fotosinteticheskie kharakteristiki nekotorykh vidov mkhov v techenie vegetatsionnogo sezona: vypusknaya kvalifikatsyonnaya rabota. Krasnoyarsk, Sibirskiy federalnyi universitet, 35 pp. (manuscript).
50. Shi X.M., Song L., Liu W.Y., Lu H.Z., Qi J.H., Li S., Chen X., Wu J.F., Liu S., Wu C.S. 2017. Epiphytic bryophytes as bio-indicators of atmospheric nitrogen deposition in a subtropical montane cloud forest: Response patterns, mechanism, and critical load. Environmental Pollution, 229: 932–941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.07.077
51. Shmakova N.Yu., Lukyanova L.M., Bulycheva T.M., Kudryavtseva O.V. 2006. Produktsionnyi protsess v soobshchestvakh gornoy tundry Khibin. Apatity, 125 pp.
52. Smith J.M. 1982. Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 233 pp.
53. Tsaryk Y.V., Tsaryk I.Y. 2002. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Series Biology, 28: 163–169.
54. Weibull H. 2001. Influence of tree species on the epilithic bryophyte flora in deciduous forests of Sweden. Journal of Bryology, 23: 55–56. https://doi.org/10.1179/jbr.2001.23.1.55
55. Walter H. 1968. Vegetation der Erde in Öko-physiologischer Betrachtung, Bd. 1. Jena: VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, 975 pp.
56. Znotiņa V. 2003. Epiphytic bryophytes and lichens in boreal and northern temperate forests. Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences, 57(1/2): 1–10.